Whilst there is "evidence" that extra runways at Heathrow will be in "The National Interest" quite how the benefit will ripple across The North, remains as hazy as the view from a runway with an RVR of less than 200ms.
There are still many Qs unanswered and certainly to me this is where the Transport Select Committee who are scrutinising this project need to be much more robust and forensic in their questioning. The "public costs" are at least now well detailed, although is it just me that seems to think they have only manifested themselves since a poster on here first alerted us to them a few months back ?
(Thanks Shed)
I refer to the state aid element of course,
(Transport Select Comittee members are you reading this...) if of course HAL want to throw £20B+ of there own money at this then by all means, proceed. I'm sure they will argue "National Interest" when they put there bowl out for the collection after the sermon, but hang on they will of course be the main benefactor of all future profits regardless of where the investment originates private .........OR indeed public !!!
The "costs" will start to kick in on the first day a yes decison is made ! The actual "income" figures being tossed around by those who are gushing about its probable success, well shall we just say they seem somewhat more vague as to a precise date we see a return.
AND what is the national ROI , "£250B, £300B, £450B" it really depends which day of the week it is and which way the wind is blowing.
How will this return be actually spilt ?
If the country puts in a third do we then deserve a third of the future profit or does it all go to HAL ?
#justasking
It's a bit like the country taking out a 20 year mortgage, it needs repaying from day 1 but it will be at least 20+ years before the debt is paid and even longer for any benefits to begin to accrue. Even then how long will it actually be before this multi billion windfall washes across the country and The North in particular?
Most importantly how does the country gaurantee its "own" return ?
Is it best use of £6,000,000,000m and WHO will ensure our investment is protected OR is it simply written off ?
Local MPs primarily should support initiatives in their own area. They should of course also support issues in "The National Interest" but not without recourse to their implications not least where there is a cost involved.
There are many MPs of a Northern persausion on the Transport Select Committee Louise Elhman (Liverpool), Graham Stringer (Manchester), Jason McCartney (Colne Valley). They do of course have to be totally impartial but not to the point where those "local interests" are discarded " at any cost" !
Mrs Elhman and Mr Stringer would do well to follow Mr McCartneys lead...
Those same MPs should also be mindful that an investment in their local area "might" be more immediatly transformational whilst the aggregate investment in a project 200 miles away with a timeline of over 20 years somewhat less so.
It is the type of reasoned questioning they should be following.
Maybe there are other projects across The North and indeed the UK of equal merit ! I think the term is "bangs for your buck".
I hasten to add I am not suggesting throwing cash around on ad hoc basis but investment in properly costed infastructure where
current thinking suggests we would obtain a real benefit and a thoroughly costed return.
I could be narrow minded here, a one sixth (yes one sixth, that's all) , spend of the the Heathrow allocation on say Manchester Airport would pay for all of Airport City...
and still leave £200m in small change !
Alternatively could £1B be used for terminal expansion and improvement ?
How long to complete 3, 4 years ? Probably 5 years at most !
Utterly transformational for The North AND the added benefit of not having to wait a minimum of another 16 or 17 years for that still vague "Heathrow trickledown effect".
Given MAGs track record of paying back divdends at least we know "The Country" would get its money back.....
Of course there is a problem , we are not in London but could investment in an airport that is
- Central to the vast majority of the UK population.
- Serves 22m people
- Connects all the regions of the UK from Inverness to Newquay,
- Has thee best rail connections of any airport in the UK
- AND is less than one hour from 5 of our largest Cities
..... not be considered to be "In The National Interest" ?
Or
is it mandatory to be a "London Thing" ?
I suspect Frank is polishing the keys on his laptop as I type !